Letter of Claim BWLegal/Premier Park LTD

Coupon-mad

Yep, except not:

To whom it may concern,

The salutation for any solicitor firm is:

Dear Sirs

{and ends}:

Yours faithfully,

YOUR NAME


{and of course a heading with their ref}

1505grandad

"....to quote DLUHC's Neil O'Brein MP)..."

Might be a good idea to correctly spell Neil O'Brien MP.

James90210

Thank you both - I shall email that letter (with the corrected spelling) and update when I hear back!

James90210

Just updating this as have now had a response from BWLegal - 

To paraphrase: 'Whilst the Private Parking Code of Practice has been published, it's not in effect - ergo their client isn't in breach. And the reference to the consumer credit sourcebook is irrelevant to the case at hand as no credit has been provided. Their position remains the same with regards to their client'.

Coupon-mad

They would say that, wouldn't they?

No-one said the client was 'in breach' of the draft new code.  You were simply pointing out that any PPC and roboclaim 'legal' playing with a straight bat, cannot pretend that costs were incurred when they were not, and nor can they (in all good faith) issue claims including a pseudo 'debt recovery' add-on that the DLUHC Minister has declared is 'designed to extort money'.

James90210

Yes, I guess I expected as much from these bullying parasites.

I suppose I just sit back and wait now for the (seemingly) inevitable Letter of Claim.
Will update in due course - thanks again for the support you've given for people like myself stuck in these situations.

Coupon-mad

I'd hit back with what I said above.

The words 'in good faith' were carefully chosen - Consumer Rights Act - and they know it.

Puts them and their clients on the spot.  I feel people need to robustly push back more at pre-action stage now the fake costs are exposed as 'extortion' and banned.

James90210

How about - 

'Thank you for your response.

Just to clarify, what I'm trying to point out is that no PPC or their legal representative 'playing with a straight bat' can now ascertain that any 'costs' were incurred (as they aren't). Neither can you, in all good faith apply a 'debt recovery' addon that the DLUHC Minister has declared as 'designed to extort money'.

So I would implore you at this stage to discuss again with your client whether this alleged 'debt' is worth pursuing in the intimidating, extortionate way in which you're continuing to do so?'

Coupon-mad

I think I'd 'urge' rather than 'implore' which looks like you are desperately begging them.

No need for a question mark and in fact, you could lose the whole final paragraph to make it more punchy.

James90210

Thank you.

I'll do just that and update again as and when I hear anything

have a nice weekend.